However, some of the cases appear to be genuinely on behalf of regular constituents.

Williamson wrote to former commissioner Howard Broad in 2008 on behalf of the mother of a young constituent in his electorate.

While the details of the troubles the boy had got into were redacted from the letter, the mother had reported to Williamson that her son had experienced “a very heavy-handed approach to a not so serious situation,” Williamson wrote.

“A simple warning by the police officer involved in a case such as has been presented to me would appear to have sufficed,” Williamson said.

He would “appreciate” it if Broad would investigate, he added.

A year later in 2009, Williamson again wrote to Broad, on behalf of another constituent who had come to New Zealand hoping to join the police, but was now in a “catch-22″ because of immigration rules.

“[Name deleted] has had a number of years of service … and his CV … shows that he would appear to make an excellent serving police officer,” Williamson said.

He asked Broad to investigate whether anything could be done for him.

An MP can contact Police on some issues. The examples above are Maurice Williamson doing what most electorate MPs would do. The Dong Liu case was different as that was a call on behalf of a defendant in a case under active consideration for prosecution. That was inappropriate, but these other communications are quite routine and expected,

Related posts:

This entry was posted on Saturday, May 24th, 2014 at 12:00 pm and is filed under NZ Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

When politics are about society and common sense solutions instead of international/financial agenda’s we could all relax.

Bankers and politicians thrive on the gullible and naieve. Those same ones who believe anyone who does not adhere to the official narrative need meds in secure facilities. Those secure facilities are needed for exactly the politicians and their ilk.

I contacted Maurice Williamson as Minister of Land Information in May 2013 about a change in policy where a notice for a caveat to lapse is not only sent by regular mail instead of registered mail. Usually most are done by a lawyer employed by by the caveator.

In my case my former lawyer and close friend who was borrowing money off me arranged the caveat which he told me was as good as a mortgage and the property could not be sold without me being notified. I had never taken out a caveat before so did not realize I should notify LINZ. I asked about more effort be made so caveators be notified and also if problems like mine where a caveator has not received notice and lost money as a result.

Mr Williamson was most unhelpful. He could not answer if I was the only person who had this problem. And told me I should have had an independent lawyer which I of course knew after the event.

Now Mr Williamson know it is easy to by wise in hindsight. Never trust a lawyer whether he be your best friend or your brother.

The journalists are from Roseneath, Thorndon and areas like that.
One wonders what a bloke in those areas would have to do to get his local M.P. to act on his behalf. The thoughts that come to mind are nauseating.

This is another a great opportunity to ‘look on the bright side’, ‘every cloud has a bright silver lining’ if it’s a National Party MP.
Let’s make him a finalist in New Zealander of the Year along with Judith Collins, eh?

They can, but surely it would be far wiser to contact the Minister? The same applies to almost any other situation, especially where it could appear you were applying undue pressure to a public servant… immigration, for instance.

The Police are accountable to their Minister, and their Minister to Parliament. That’s the “chain of command”. Besides which, bypassing the Minister reinforces the idea that the Police are a law unto themselves, answerable to no one (and certainly not to the taxpayers who fund them) and that an MP is merely a mendicant. A “please explain” from the Minister reminds them they’re not.

Rex: I respectfully disagree (since it’s all peace and love between us these days!!)

You are quite right about the chain of command, but any “please xplain” from the Minister that followed on from an enquiry from an MP – or a member of the public for that matter – surely runs a very real risk of political interference in the doings of the Police?

And that is an absolute no no in our system….As I understand it, the Minister’s role is to appoint the Commissioner, and potentially to sack him for incompetence or poor performance…”Please explains” regarding day to day operational matters gets into very murky territory…

If Williamson was not trying to influence a Police prosecution what was he trying to do. It is a fine line between making representations to the Police over a prosecution and trying to stifle or pervert the course of justice. Ministers because of their power and influence are told to stay away from this area in the Cabinet manual. Williamson sort of gets this, but he keeps banging on that he does not wish to influence the Police. But his representations had the impression of a threat and that is getting very close to attempting to pervert the course of justice.

Correct me if I am wrong (a given ;)) but has any of this much touted/maligned lobbying or ‘corruption’ that has been trotted out demonstrably altered an outcome?

Not for Justice, Immigration, Trade, not for smoking, not for gambling. Personally I prefer my politicians to do something or at least look like they have tried to. The checks and balances seem to work mostly.

where did we get David Garrett from,
I am glad my friend Rodney is happy, and we need a new centre right.
Garrett destroyed us with his sociopath personality simple,
no wait on Heather as well.
Now we start again but not with you dog

Dear me, this is all very civilised 😛 I see your point of view, but see it as precisely a Minister’s job to issue a “please explain” when he or she feels their Department is not behaving as they ought. Or even just to clarify why they took a certain decision.

Then again, I believe the last Minister who understood their role was Denis Marshall, who resigned as Minister of Conservation in 1996 over Cave Creek. If we’re going to expect Ministers to bear the ultimate responsibility for the stuff ups of their public servants (and we should) then they need to have the power to direct those public servants. The basis for their being able to do so is that they act as our agents in so doing, and those bureaucrats are called public servants, and not public masters, for a damned good reason.

Maurice has been in the job far too long. It is not healthy for an electorate to have the same MP for 27 years. Its time to go Maurice and yet another National seat warmer is not a positive. Any right leaning MP would be a welcome bonus.